George R.R. Martin’s adaptation moans are wrong at best and ignorant at worst

George R.R. Martin seems like a great guy, and I’ve loved getting lost in his Game of Thrones books, but that doesn’t make him infallible.

In fact, I think he’s very fallible, and I’m not just talking about his inability to stick to the Game of Thrones release schedule (sorry, George, low blow, I know). But what’s promoted this attack on the beloved fantasy author?

Well, in a recent blog post, Martin trod some particularly well-worn ground, decrying TV and movie adaptations of popular books. To paraphrase George slightly, he believes that screenwriters and producers are too eager to take “great stories” and make them their own.

He then lists a number of authors, including Stan Lee, Charles Dickens, Ian Fleming, Ursula K. Le Guin, J.R.R. Tolkien, and Jane Austen, before concluding that “they never make it better, though. 999 times out of a thousand, they make it worse.”

Game of Moans

Now, I’m not going to pretend that every adaptation of a brilliant book is cinematic gold, but I must admit I find George’s central argument reductive and a bit biased. One only needs to scroll through their streaming service of choice, and they’ll find plenty of amazing adaptations of literary work and some that even improve on their source material. 

So get on your Maester’s chain and get out your scalpels because we’re going to dissect this tired argument and prove Martin wrong. 

I could sit here and list all of the great movie and TV adaptations of great books, but that would fail to address the nuance in Martin’s argument. So let’s start with his main point that “everywhere you look, there are more screenwriters and producers eager to take great stories and ‘make them their own.’”

Change is good

George isn’t 100% wrong here; it’s a regular complaint that writers take original ideas and put their own spin on them, but I fail to see why that’s automatically a bad thing. Take, for example, the ‘90s Spider-Man Animated Series, which adapted the Black Suit Saga from the comics and added a new twist to the tale. In the show, the symbiote brings out the more negative aspects of Peter’s personality, making him more aggressive and merciless, and that’s why he rejects it.

That was a change the writers made to the source material, but it was a good idea (It’s why I included it on our list of the best superhero TV shows). In the comics, Peter rejects the symbiotic suit for pretty superficial reasons, but here, he has a legitimate reason for getting rid of it. That version of the story wasn’t in the source material, but it was such a good change that it’s become part of the symbiote’s established lore in the comics, movies, and games.

George’s comments presume that any change is immediately bad, and that’s just not the case. That’s hardly the only example, either; let’s look at Psycho, written by Robert Bloch. In the book, Norman Bates is a complete creep from the off and obviously unstable. Hitchcock and his screenwriter Joseph Stefan changed this so the audience would feel some initial sympathy for Bates, which helped to sell the bonkers final twist — a change that arguably cemented Psycho’s place in history as one of the best horror movies ever made. 

Now, I agree with Martin that not all changes work, and some might not always be to the viewer’s taste, but you can’t claim “999 times out of a thousand.” It’s for the worse; it’s just too simplistic a statement and potentially speaks to Martin’s own biases. 

Old complaints

We know that he wasn’t entirely happy with HBO’s Game of Thrones because he believed he had enough material to keep the show going for at least 10, if not 13 seasons. It’s clear that Thrones was a project he was passionate about, and I think the reaction to an ending he felt was rushed might have clouded his judgment here. 

However, George’s hopes of making even more Thrones speak to yet another oversimplification when adapting material for another medium. When you’re writing a book, the characters, settings, and stories are at your beck and call. All you need to do is summon them from your imagination and get to work.

The same isn’t true when making a film or show. Actors and writers have contracts, responsibilities, and other jobs. The idea of the Thrones cast committing to another five years making a show that had launched them to international fame, especially when Hollywood was beckoning, was wonderfully naive. 

Beyond that, it fails to take into account the fact that people get bored, even when they have their dream job. I know Benioff and Weiss get a lot of sh*t for ‘going off to make Star Wars,’ but are you really telling me that you wouldn’t jump at the chance to work on your dream project? I know I would. George’s comments ignore the complexities and compromises that go into making any piece of art. 

What Shogun-na do about it?

George knows he’s wrong as well. In the blog post, he admits to liking the recent adaptation of Shogun, writing that it’s “superb” and “faithful to the Clavell novel in [its] own way.” You’ll forgive me then, George, for saying this, but I really think your biases are showing here. You can’t make generalizations and then immediately undermine your own argument.

Still, as you’ve made a sweeping statement, maybe you’ll forgive me for making one myself as my final point. Here’s a list of adaptations that are as good, if not better, than their source material: The Boys, Invincible, X-Men ’97, The Last of Us, Reacher, Heartstopper, Normal People, Shawshank Redemption, The Thing, Jurassic Park, Jaws, Die Hard, I could go on, so I will… Spectacular Spider-Man, Sherlock, Outlander, A Very English Scandal, The Haunting of Hill House, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, and Band of Brothers.

Had enough? Well, I don’t know if you heard me over the sound of yet another deadline wooshing by you, so I’ll carry on: Big Little Lies, Roots, Ripley, Superman, Spider-Man 2, The Leftovers, The Handmaid’s Tale, and dare I say it House of the Dragon. 

I’m sorry, George, your argument was wrong and poorly thought out. I’m guessing you’re annoyed about what happened with Thrones, but there have been loads of great TV and movie adaptations that have expanded on the source material, and you shouldn’t let your own experience prejudice you against those wonderful works of art.

If you’re looking for some more wonderful works of art, why not check out our list of all the new movies out this month and the new TV shows? We’ve also got a list of the best movies of 2024 if you’re looking to catch up on any gems you might have missed.